The real story of the Irish who fought with the Confederate Army is only just starting to be told

Can you show a peer review from other historian's to back up your assertion the Davis Williams who's book " Bitterly Divided the South's inner Civil War" is extensively well sourced is merely a hustle ? Are we supposed to just accept the narrative that Secessionists weren't fighting for slavery but to create a multi racial democracy?
Leftyhunter

You have criticized the esteemed and renowned historian James G. Randall, in so many words as not knowing what he talking about, and then defend a hack like David Williams. I won't mention Williams' Lumbee Indian mendacity again, but can a serious reader really believe the Confederate States were that “bitterly divided” or that there was an intense “inner Civil War” raging down here and yet its army was able to keep the enemy out of Richmond (approximately a hundred miles away from their own capital for four years.
 
I wonder if Tucker mentions that an Irish deserter from the Confederate Army defected to a Unionist regiment from Tennessee and then wearing civilian cloths infiltrated Confederate lines as Nd assassinated Confederate General John Hunt Morgan?
Leftyhunter
 
You have criticized the esteemed and renowned historian James G. Randall, in so many words as not knowing what he talking about, and then defend a hack like David Williams. I won't mention Williams' Lumbee Indian mendacity again, but can a serious reader really believe the Confederate States were that “bitterly divided” or that there was an intense “inner Civil War” raging down here and yet its army was able to keep the enemy out of Richmond (approximately a hundred miles away from their own capital for four years.
Randall ignores scholarship on Confederate Desertion that I have referenced many times. If you have negative peer reviews on Williams please post them.
Leftyhunter
 
Anyone who asserts that Confederate Irish soldiers were not fighting for slavery despite the specific language of the Confederate Constitution is highly suspect as being an objective historian.
Leftyhunter

I doubt that there are that many men who enlist to fight for constitutional principles as their primary motivations in any army. I especially doubt that there were many Northerners signing up to fight for the constitutional principles set forth by the secessionist Founding Fathers.
 
I doubt that there are that many men who enlist to fight for constitutional principles as their primary motivations in any army. I especially doubt that there were many Northerners signing up to fight for the constitutional principles set forth by the secessionist Founding Fathers.
You know this by conducting a scientific poll of Confederate veterans? The Confederate Constitution is very plain about where it stands regarding slavery. Any one who joins the Confederate Army is fighting to uphold it's Constitution. It would be very strange to fight for a political movement that makes its stance on slavery very well known if one is in fact an abolitionist.
Leftyhunter
 
Randall ignores scholarship on Confederate Desertion that I have referenced many times. If you have negative peer reviews on Williams please post them.
Leftyhunter

No, he doesn't, see footnotes at the bottom of page 516. Bessie Martin, Desertion of Alabama Troops, p. 148., Ella Lonn, Desertion during the Civil War, pp.23, 119, 123-124.
J.G. Randall and David Donald, Civil War and Reconstruction.

Now please show Williams' foot or endnotes for Confederate desertion.
 
No, he doesn't, see footnotes at the bottom of page 516. Bessie Martin, Desertion of Alabama Troops, p. 148., Ella Lonn, Desertion during the Civil War, pp.23, 119, 123-124.
J.G. Randall and David Donald, Civil War and Reconstruction.

Now please show Williams' foot or endnotes for Confederate desertion.
Williams has numerous citations in his book. Also Randall states that desertion in the Union Army was worse then the Confederate Army but yet Davis himself states that 2/3rds of the Confederate Army was AWOL during the critical Sumner fighting season of 1864. Do they both can't be right.
Leftyhunter
 
Williams has numerous citations in his book. Also Randall states that desertion in the Union Army was worse then the Confederate Army but yet Davis himself states that 2/3rds of the Confederate Army was AWOL during the critical Sumner fighting season of 1864. Do they both can't be right.
Leftyhunter
An obvious exaggeration by Davis; I have pointed out in earlier posts similar hyperbole by Northern politicians. Even a much smaller Confederate Army, but man for man superior, could have lasted until 1865 if that was true.
 
An obvious exaggeration by Davis; I have pointed out in earlier posts similar hyperbole by Northern politicians. Even a much smaller Confederate Army, but man for man superior, could have lasted until 1865 if that was true.
How do you know Davis exaggerated?
Leftyhunter
 
If he didn't exaggerate, according to you and the David Williams types what was left of the Confederate Army would not have been only man for man superior they would have had to be super-human to have remained in the field until 1865.
Has we discussed many times holding on to small amounts of territory is not proof of being superior.
Leftyhunter
 
What scholars might they be? Perhaps as a Historian, this Author may have the correct estimate after a deep search and time spent looking. Which would make him doing his job better than others just coming to light.
Pat Young quoted the actual sources and specific authors. Given a population of only 80,000 Irish born residents of the Confederate states, 40000 seems like an impossibly large number.
 
Pat Young quoted the actual sources and specific authors. Given a population of only 80,000 Irish born residents of the Confederate states, 40000 seems like an impossibly large number.

Even adding in the border state Irish born population (another 50,000+), 40,000 is still a huge number.

Ryan
 
Even adding in the border state Irish born population (another 50,000+), 40,000 is still a huge number.

Ryan
Even adding in the border state Irish born population (another 50,000+), 40,000 is still a huge number.

Ryan
And that's assuming every border state Irish immigrant was pro-Confederate. I just finished reading James Love's letters to his fiancé. He's a Irish born immigrant living in Missouri and he and his friends are pro-Union.

I'm sure that lots of Irish immigrants in the South supported the Confederacy for very similar reasons as other Southerners. But 40,000 is simply too big a fraction of a relatively small group.
 
Back
Top